There are several tax implications which a person will need to be aware of in relation to the transfer of property to a child or spouse. Any attempts to give away assets during your lifetime are potentially subject to some form of inheritance tax (IHT) although many transfers will not be immediately chargeable if they qualify as potentially exempt transfers (PETs) or if another relief of exemption such as the

Time limits for the assessment of costs between parties following commencement of proceedings For the assessment of inter-partes costs 'after' the commencement of proceedings, Part 47 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) sets out a comprehensive timetable. In general, a receiving party has to start detailed assessment proceedings within three months of the date of judgment or the date of service of notice of discontinuance (CPR 47.7). Failure to comply with these time limits can lead to an order requiring the receiving party commences proceedings, as well as further sanctions such as an unless order being imposed by the court disallowing part of the costs, on the application of the paying party. If the paying party does not dispute the bill by way of points of dispute within 21 days of service of the notice of commencement, the receiving party may apply for a default costs certificate. The procedure to obtain an order for costs following

Practice Note: Biometric Immigration Documents confirms that: ‘An application for a replacement BRP must be made if the original BID is lost, stolen or damaged, if they are a child and their BID has expired ahead of their leave, or if they have ILR and their BID has expired. The application in such circumstances is made on form BRP(RC).’ The requirement to apply for a replacement BRP derives from the Immigration (Biometric Registration) Regulations 2008, SI 2008/3048, reg 19. This states (our emphasis): ‘19 (1) A person who has been issued with a biometric immigration document under regulation 13(1), 13A(1) or 13B(1) is required to apply for a replacement biometric immigration document where his original document— (a) has been cancelled under paragraphs (a) to (g) of regulation 17; or (b) has ceased to

The new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (the Protocol) came into force on 1 October 2017. Where the Protocol applies, the court will expect parties to comply with its provisions prior to commencing a claim and will take into account non-compliance when giving directions for the management of any subsequent proceedings (paragraph 7 of the Protocol). The Protocol contains no transitional provisions. See Precedent: Letter of claim—contractual debt claim—in compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims and Practice Notes: The pre-action protocols and when they apply and Debt claims and

In English law, the expression ‘force majeure’ does not refer to a legal doctrine. Instead, the expression ‘force majeure clause’ is used to describe a contractual term which may provide, for example, that on the happening of a specified event or event beyond the parties’ control, one (or both) of the parties: • is excused from performance of the contract, in whole or in part • is entitled to suspend performance

What temporary guidance has been issued by the FCA? The Financial conduct Authority (FCA) has issued temporary guidance, applying for an initial period of three months, to a significant number of firms in the consumer credit sector. • On 9 April 2020, the FCA published its finalised temporary guidance to consumer credit firms dealing with customers needing coronavirus (COVID-19) related payment holidays for personal loans, credit cards and retail revolving credit (for example, catalogue credit or store cards) and overdrafts. This guidance came into force on 14 April 2020. For more, see: Q&A: On 9 April 2020, the Financial Conduct authority confirmed a package of targeted temporary measures to help people with some of the most commonly used consumer credit products. What are the implications of the measures? • On 24 April 2020, the FCA published its finalised temporary guidance

Section 21 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) in the form that commonly appears provides for regulations to be made about the provision by landlords of dwellings in respect of which services charges are payable to tenants by whom service charges are payable. No such regulations have in fact been made, and the amendments made to the section by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 and the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 have only been brought into force insofar as the power to make regulations is concerned. Therefore it is important for practitioners to be aware that the version of LTA 1985, s 21 as it otherwise

This question appears to be looking for a case dealing with whether variable costs can be deducted from a net profits figure in calculating damages. At the time of writing we are not aware of any direct authority about the deductibility of variable costs in calculating damages for any type of design right infringement (and we could not be certain about cases eg in other EU countries in relation to damages for Community unregistered (or registered) design infringement). However, there have been cases about deductibility of fixed costs, and it appears logical extrapolating from those that it should be possible to deduct variable costs—this is also indicated in a Court of Appeal case on trade marks (parallel imports). Damages in IP cases Few cases get as far as a second trial by way of damages inquiry as it is so expensive for the litigants to do this in addition to the main trial establishing liability for infringement, so unfortunately there are still very few

Costs on the small claims track are governed by CPR 27.14. The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party’s costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal except the fixed costs attributable to issuing the claim, in accordance with Table 2 in CPR PD 45: • a specified sum if the proceedings included a claim for an injunction or specific performance • any court fees paid • reasonable party and witness expenses and loss of earnings up to a fixed sum • expert

Practice Note: Establishing a claim for private nuisance highlights a number of cases you may find helpful in researching this point, including, Raymond v Young, in which the Court of Appeal provided a clear analysis of the authorities on the extent to which a claimant can be awarded damages for loss of capital value resulting from nuisance. Our News Analysis

In researching this Q&A, we have been unable to find any exemption releasing the regulator from its rights and responsibilities as a riparian owner. However the riparian presumption can be rebutted in certain situations (see below). There is a presumption that the owner of land adjoining a river or stream (ie the riparian owner) owns the river bed up to the centre line of the river or stream. If the presumption does not apply and the river bed belongs to a third party, the boundary is the water line when the river is in its normal state. There is also a presumption that the owner of the bed of the river has the

A resulting trust is a form of trust recognised in equity which is implied or presumed out of the presumption of the parties. Normally, if A provided the money to buy Blackacre which is transferred into the name of B, a resulting trust will be presumed in favour of A. For more information, see Practice Note: Resulting trusts. A constructive trust is another species of presumed or implied trust and in circumstances such as this will arise out of the common intention of the parties that A was to have an interest in the property acquired. A constructive trust most frequently arises in the circumstances where a property is acquired for two people to live in but is transferred into the name of only one of the parties.